From: "Neil Jerram" <neiljerram@googlemail.com>
To: hanwen@xs4all.nl
Cc: guile-devel@gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Avoid `SCM_VALIDATE_LIST ()'
Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2008 00:32:59 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <49dd78620809061532i76ccf7a4rb0c2d838d51cb504@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <g9i9cn$tb8$1@ger.gmane.org>
2008/9/2 Han-Wen Nienhuys <hanwen@xs4all.nl>:
>
> If you are doing memq? for something you already know to
> somewhere in front of the list [...]
Why would you do that? In two senses:
1. I know memq gives you the tail of the list, but I usually use its
result only as a true/false value Why would run use memq like that in
a situation where you already know that it will give you true?
2. It feels unusual to me to have a long list, but in which certain
kinds of values are known always to be near the front. That sounds
like something that should really be represented as two (or more)
separate lists.
Have you observed this (the current usage of SCM_VALIDATE_LIST) as a
performance problem in practice?
Regards,
Neil
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-09-06 22:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 45+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-08-31 22:02 [PATCH] Avoid `SCM_VALIDATE_LIST ()' Ludovic Courtès
2008-09-01 0:12 ` Han-Wen Nienhuys
2008-09-01 20:19 ` Neil Jerram
2008-09-01 20:30 ` Ludovic Courtès
2008-09-02 2:40 ` Han-Wen Nienhuys
2008-09-06 22:23 ` Neil Jerram
2008-09-06 21:36 ` Neil Jerram
2008-09-07 4:23 ` Ken Raeburn
2008-09-07 15:24 ` Neil Jerram
2008-09-07 17:30 ` Ken Raeburn
2008-09-07 19:21 ` Neil Jerram
2008-09-08 23:11 ` Neil Jerram
2008-09-09 8:28 ` Ludovic Courtès
2008-09-10 20:43 ` Neil Jerram
2008-09-04 18:24 ` Andy Wingo
2008-09-05 0:10 ` Han-Wen Nienhuys
2008-09-05 1:06 ` Andy Wingo
2008-09-06 22:45 ` Neil Jerram
2008-09-07 2:33 ` Han-Wen Nienhuys
2008-09-07 13:38 ` Neil Jerram
2008-09-07 15:00 ` Han-Wen Nienhuys
2008-09-07 16:19 ` Neil Jerram
2008-09-07 19:25 ` Han-Wen Nienhuys
2008-09-07 14:05 ` Andy Wingo
2008-09-07 15:38 ` development goals (was: [PATCH] Avoid `SCM_VALIDATE_LIST ()') Han-Wen Nienhuys
2008-09-07 20:03 ` Neil Jerram
2008-09-08 4:28 ` development goals Han-Wen Nienhuys
2008-09-08 10:16 ` Ludovic Courtès
2008-09-08 13:57 ` Han-Wen Nienhuys
2008-09-09 7:08 ` Andy Wingo
2008-09-08 10:27 ` Ludovic Courtès
2008-09-06 22:40 ` [PATCH] Avoid `SCM_VALIDATE_LIST ()' Neil Jerram
2008-09-01 21:09 ` Neil Jerram
2008-09-01 21:47 ` Ludovic Courtès
2008-09-06 22:15 ` Neil Jerram
2008-09-08 9:40 ` Ludovic Courtès
2008-09-06 23:11 ` Mikael Djurfeldt
2008-09-07 2:43 ` Han-Wen Nienhuys
2008-09-07 15:04 ` Neil Jerram
2008-09-07 13:32 ` Neil Jerram
2008-09-02 2:44 ` Han-Wen Nienhuys
2008-09-06 22:32 ` Neil Jerram [this message]
2008-09-08 3:13 ` Han-Wen Nienhuys
2008-09-08 4:42 ` Clinton Ebadi
2008-09-08 9:47 ` Ludovic Courtès
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/guile/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=49dd78620809061532i76ccf7a4rb0c2d838d51cb504@mail.gmail.com \
--to=neiljerram@googlemail.com \
--cc=guile-devel@gnu.org \
--cc=hanwen@xs4all.nl \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).